Cervical cancer screening invitations in low and middle income countries: Evidence from Armenia
Open accessAbstract
Roughly 90 percent of cervical cancer deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where the lack of adequate infrastructures hampers screening, while informational, cultural, and socio-economic barriers limit participation in the few programs that do exist. We conducted a field experiment with the Armenian cervical cancer screening program to determine whether, despite these barriers, the simple, economical invitation strategies adopted in high-income countries could enhance screening take-up in LMICs. We find that letters of invitation increase screening take-up, especially when there are follow-up reminders. Different ways of framing messages appear to have no impact. Finally, women in rural areas are more likely to respond to invitation by letter, helping to narrow the urban-rural screening gap.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In Armenia, there was no difference found between framing the letter neutrally by giving general information, negatively by highlighting the adverse effects, or other-regarding by stressing the impact on family members.
“In Armenia, there was no difference found between framing the letter neutrally by giving general information, negatively by highlighting the adverse effects, or other-regarding by stressing the impact on family members [53].”
From Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review (2026) · cites this paper as [53]
In Armenia, invitation letters have increased CC screening, especially when there are follow-up reminders.
“In Armenia, invitation letters have increased CC screening, especially when there are follow-up reminders [53].”
From Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review (2026) · cites this paper as [53]
Cites
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 17,604 · see citing works
Joshi, R., Alim, M., Kengne, A. P., Jan, S., Maulik, P. K., Peiris, D., & Patel, A. A. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0103754 · Cited by 589 · see citing works
Higgs, E. S., Goldberg, A. B., Labrique, A. B., Cook, S. H., Schmid, C., Cole, C. F., & Obregón, R. A. (2014) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730.2014.929763 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Rees, I., Jones, D., Chen, H., & Macleod, U. (2018) · Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.11.019 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Campos, N. G., Sharma, M., Clark, A., Lee, K., Geng, F., Regan, C., Kim, J., & Resch, S. (2017) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1002/ijgo.12184 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review
Palsola, M., Likki, T., Snijders, V., Corbex, M., Lasierra, L., & Curtis, B. (2026) · Glasnik javnog zdravlja · doi:10.5937/serbjph2601086p
- Authors
- Antinyan, A., Bertoni, M., & Corazzini, L.
- Affiliations
- Zhongnan University of Economics and Law (CN)
- University of Padua (IT)
- Ca' Foscari University of Venice (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Antinyan, Armenak
- Venue
- Social Science & Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-03
- Volume
- 273
- Pages
- 113739
- ISSN
- 0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3128717257
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 3.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
- ARCA (Università Ca' Foscari Venezia) (submittedVersion)
- Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Government of the Russian Federation
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
- Keywords
- cervical cancer screening, screening invitations, low- and middle-income countries, Armenia, follow-up reminders, message framing, urban-rural differences, health communication, barriers to screening
- MeSH terms
- Armenia, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Developing Countries, Female, Humans, Mass Screening, Early Detection of Cancer
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review